Serena Williams' Wimbledon loss wasn't a moral victory, it was a triumphant defeat

Serena Williams' Wimbledon loss wasn't a moral victory, it was a triumphant defeat

Moral victories are for losers. Serena Williams is not a loser. Thus, by the transitive property, Serena Williams doesn’t do moral victories.

It’s an important distinction given what happened in Saturday’s Wimbledon final. Williams, just 10 months after giving birth, was on her sport’s biggest stage, two sets away from winning the most prestigious title in tennis, when she got worked over by Angelique Kerber, 6-3, 6-3. The match denied Serena her all-time record-tying 24th Grand Slam title (she already holds the record for most of the Open era), gave Kerber her third major and also made her the only woman outside the Williams family to defeat Serena twice in a Grand Slam final.

But there are no excuses to be made, not because of toddlers or conditioning or rust. If Serena was good enough to make the finals of Wimbledon with everything going on in her life, she was good enough to win the finals of Wimbledon with everything going on in her life. Sometimes you just get beat.

(Getty Images)

Kerber was the worst possible matchup for Serena, as she presented a much different challenge than the six women Serena defeated en route to the final. The first five weren’t seeded. The last two, the only ones with a legitimate chance to pull an upset, were the big-hitting, go-for-broke players Camila Giorgi and Julia Goerges. And then came Kerber, a former No. 1 who plays a style that hasn’t often worked against Serena (she was only 2-6 against her lifetime) but was tailor-made for this tournament.

She’s a counterpuncher. The fallen opponents in Serena’s draw tried to answer the champ’s power with power of their own, a fight they were destined to (and did) lose. You can’t outhit the biggest hitter.

Kerber took the blows, a tennis version of rope-a-dope, content to get balls back over the net and let the match play out from there. On this day, that often meant Serena overcooking shots or getting caught on the other side of the court as Kerber put away easy winners on long rallies. Though the German wasn’t the aggressor, she still out-attacked the greatest attacker in tennis.

(Getty Images)

This wasn’t a failure of conditioning or any match rustiness, the kind you’d figure a new mom might have in only her second major tournament. The opportunities were there, but she either let them pass without taking advantage or was so stymied by Kerber’s defense that she didn’t have much of a chance to open up the court for herself. Serena rushed shots, sailed easy groundstrokes, missed put-aways, failed to seize the big moments and, most importantly, couldn’t return Kerber’s average serve.

And even with all that, she only lost a Wimbledon final 6-3, 6-3 to a future tennis Hall of Famer. To recap: Serena Williams defeated six world-class opponents with, at best, her B-game, leaving only scorched ryegrass in her wake, and then fell a little short against a former world No. 1. If returns and recoveries are a process, Serena is way ahead of pace.

The most encouraging moment was when Serena showed a flash of her unique, on-court ferocity. Just like she did in the quarterfinals (when she stared down Giorgi for having the audacity to ask for another moment to get ready for the serve), Serena tried to intimidate her way into the match, smacking a ball directly at Kerber early in the second set.

(Getty Images)

Against Giorgi, it worked. Serena pumped herself up, maybe got into Giorgi’s head and went on a roll. It wasn’t as successful against Kerber. The ball missed, sailed long and Kerber calmly went about her game. But seeing that fire still burning was the best sign yet that this new version of Serena will be different in traveling party only.

And while it’s tempting to invoke Serena’s maternity leave as an excuse for today’s performance, doing so is a disservice to both her and Kerber. It suggests the empowerment Serena has personified at Wimbledon has its limits and that Kerber was playing a compromised opponent. Neither is true. If the draw had turned a different way and Serena faced, say, Jelena Ostapenko in the final, she would have had a favorable chance of winning. Circumstances don’t define us. If Serena’s accomplishment was great on Saturday morning, it was great on Saturday afternoon too.

After the loss, Serena almost seemed to apologize for her defeat, as if having an erratic forehand and underwhelming serve somehow diminished what she’d accomplished in London over the fortnight.

"I was really happy to get this far. For all the moms out there, I was playing for you today"

If you watched the video, Serena’s quote was a little different than what the @Wimbledon tweet reads. “I’m just me and that’s all I can be,” Serena said in response to a question about her being a Super-Mom. “To all the moms out there, I was playing for you today and I tried.”

It was said through tears, with a tinge of regret, as many statements by Grand Slam runner-ups are. But look again. This time, read the quote like it was spoken with an air of triumph.

“I’m just me and that’s all I can be. To all the moms out there, I was playing for you today and I tried.”

Serena Williams' Wimbledon loss wasn't a moral victory, it was a triumphant defeat

Serena Williams doesn’t do moral victories.

I found this on FTW and wanted to share:
%link%
For more great sports stories ...
*visit For The Win: https://www.ftw.usatoday.com
*follow @ForTheWin: https://www.twitter.com/forthewin
*like FTW on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/usatodayftw